Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Under section 13 of the Code, the adjudicating authority after admission of the application under section 7 or 9 or 10 of the IBC Code shall declare a moratorium which shall include the prohibition of the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against […]
Held that payment of federal taxes on the different between FMV and the grant price establishes that assessee is paying tax treating the value of shares as perquisite. Accordingly, provisions of section 49(2AA) are applicable. Cost of acquisition of share cannot be FMV.
Held that penalty u/s 271F leviable as the assessee being a co-operative bank failed to furnish annual information annual information return
DCIT Vs Neueon Towers Limited (ITAT Hyderabad) A reading of the provisions under section 13 and 14 of IBC Code along with the decision in Ghanashyam Mishra And Sons (supra), clearly shows that once the proceedings have commenced by institution of application under section 7 or 9 or 10 of the Code, the continuance of […]
Held that activities of share trading were carried out by the directors in their individual capacity from their unique client codes. Accordingly, loss incurred in same is not allowable in the hands of company
On approval of resolution plan by all claims of Income Tax, which are not a part of resolution plan, shall stand extinguished
Held that we are inclined to allow the Cenvat Credit of input services for construction of immovable property, which is further let out to various customers.
Held that the Revenue is bound by the resolution plan as accepted by the NCLT and not entitled to anything more than what is provided therein.
ITAT held that by acquiring business rights along with tangible assets, the assessee got an up and running business and the specified intangible assets acquired under slump sale agreement are in the nature of any other business or commercial rights of a similar nature on which depreciation is allowable.
Satyabhama Avadhanula Karimnagar Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad) I find the Assessing Officer on the basis of inquiry conducted u/s 131(1)(d) made addition of Rs.22.00 lakhs being unexplained cash found from the possession of the assessee and made addition of the same u/s 69A rws 115BBE of the I.T. Act. I find the learned CIT (A) […]
